Scarbinsky: At this time, Cam Newton isn't another Reggie Bush

Winning this trophy may be the only thing Cam Newton has in common with Reggie Bush.

The comparison's been made from coast to coast, especially from the West Coast, and Cam Newton and Reggie Bush do have something in common.

As a USC junior in 2005, Bush was the best player in college football. He won the Heisman Trophy and, based on what we voters knew at the time, he deserved it.

Ditto for Newton as an Auburn junior five years later.

He's the best player in the game by land or by air. He'll be a deserving Heisman winner, too.

I plan to vote for him between Saturday's SEC Championship Game and Monday's deadline - call me crazy, but I like to see all the evidence before rendering a final verdict - and I won't hold my nose or my breath when I do.

The Heisman Trophy Trust asks us to vote for "the most outstanding college football player in the United States."

That's outstanding. Not upstanding.

I don't know if Newton is, as Gene Chizik described him four days before the Georgia game, "a great human being from a great family." Some things have changed since then.

The NCAA's finding this week that Newton's father worked with Kenny Rogers to shop the quarterback to Mississippi State certainly put a reasonable doubt on the "great family" part.

I've heard good, bad and ugly about Newton the person, publicly and privately, but I'm not voting for him for class president. Until the Heisman Trust runs background checks on all the leading candidates, I'm using the same standard that led me to vote for Rolando McClain a year ago.

Only football players of extraordinary impact need apply.

After that is where the Newton-Bush parallel runs off the rails.

Despite the misguided observations of USC rookie AD Pat Haden and others, any resemblance between them as anything more than great football players isn't coincidental. It's laughable.

"I was always told the parent is the child," Haden said. "That's what we've been telling our kids. If the parent does something inappropriate, the child suffers the consequences."

USC is scheduled to appear before the NCAA Infractions Appeals Committee next month to argue that its sanctions in the infractions case involving Bush and his family should be reduced. Haden said the school's lawyers likely will study the Newton ruling to see if they can use any aspect of it to bolster their own argument.

Good luck with that.

The NCAA finding against Cecil Newton said that he and Rogers conspired to ask for money from Mississippi State.

In short, they asked but didn't receive.

That's it.

How does that compare to the NCAA findings against Bush and his family? How much time do you have?

Here, taken from the Public Infractions Report, is just part of the long list of extra benefits the NCAA found that Bush and his family actually received:

"Several thousand dollars in cash for a down payment on a vehicle."

"Another sizeable cash payment, which the student-athlete used for a car alarm and audio system."

"Several thousand dollars in cash ... to purchase wheel rims for the vehicle."

"Cost-free round-trip limousine service."

"Two nights' lodging and incidentals at a Las Vegas resort, a value of $564."

"Approximately $10,000 in cash to purchase furniture."

"A washer and dryer."

"Cost-free use of a home for approximately one year."

That's not all, but you get the point.

The NCAA itself has noticed flawed logic running rampant since it ruled Newton eligible Wednesday. It issued another statement about the ruling Thursday.

"Many in the media and public have drawn comparisons between recent high-profile NCAA decisions while ignoring the important differences among the cases," the statement said.

One example: "If a student-athlete does not receive tangible benefits, that is a different situation from a student-athlete or family member who receives cash, housing or other benefits."

Let me translate. To the NCAA, Cam Newton is not another Reggie Bush. Not even close.